Never mind the benefits of the biomass in the hydro lake. I'm sure the
algae and plants do nothing beneficial :-)

This Science (capitol S) reminds me of the thinking in the Healthy Forest Act.

One day I will wake up and realize that it's not the millions of cars
on the roads thats causing the trouble, its the liberal tree-hugging
hippies that ride bikes and exhale more CO2 that causes all of the
problems. Do the world a favor and buy a Hummer.

- Ben

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 01:56:29 +1300, Russell McMahon
<apptech@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> Hydroelectric power makes more greenhouse gases than equivalent fossil
> fuelled generation
> 
>            http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7046
> 
> Or so they claim.
> 
> I personally find the claims dubious.
> The portion of the assumption set listed is suspect.
> The main claims are that
> 
> 1.    CO2 is made from destruction of biomass submerged when the hydro
> lake is formed.
> 
> 2.    Methane forms when remaining material falls to bottom.
> 
> 3.    Annual cycling of lake levels grows and then destroys ongoing
> biomass and produces methane..
> 
> Methane is a far more significant greenhouse gas volume for volume
> than CO2.
> 
> I wonder whether due consideration has been given to the growth and
> death of foliage on surfaces which aren't submerged. I suspect that
> most surfaces have a plant growth and death rate similar to what they
> would have if submerged cyclically. Arguably the permanently submerged
> surface will produce less GHGs long term as they are not growing
> vegetation which then dies, often annually.
> 
>         RM
> 
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist